Should Christians try to define God? This a question I run across often with denominations, creeds and other professions of their belief in God. I am happy to accept there are many things in this life that we will never know or understand in science and yet the greatest mystery of them all (IMO) "God" is often being defined by some groups. For me being a Christian is a journey into that mystery and not an arrival at a full revelation of all knowledge of ones faith.I would be interested to hear what others say.

p.s. I know this is a question directed at Christians but please do not feel you cannot join in if you see yourself as not a Christian. Sometimes greater revelations are seen with fresh eyes and ears.

Getting back to your original question,why shouldn't they?It was the Jews who started the ball rolling when they banned all the other deities and Jehovah's story has been evolving ever since.Every belief system has its mythology and I find them fascinating.I think though that there is only one core story concerning the major religions and that the names in each area are changed to prevent litigation.Or something.

It is interesting that although Egyptians believe in differing Gods they also believed that they were part of the one God (Ra) and in later times moved towards monotheism.It is also a common mistake that Hindus worship many Gods. Most do not, as they see the other Gods as expressions of the one God or OM. The Zoroastrians also claimed one God. I believe all three predate Judaism. I do not believe that Judaism was being original in developing from Henotheism to Monotheism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism

Well as civilisation (not homo sapiens/pan narans) probably started in the Indus valley/delta which is now largely under water,that is the most likely place that the whole muppet show began.The origins of Hinduism have been reckoned to go back about 12,000 years which coincides with a certain period of global warming.I'm starting to lose my thread here but what I'm trying to say is it's all about sex.The Great Bull of Heaven seeding (with meteorites) Mother Earth.It explains Nature.It's all metaphor.

Which just goes to show what a bunch of uptight self righteous arrogant power hungry types were the early Jewish Priests.IMO.

It is suggested that the early Israeli nations were said to be less oppressive than surrounding nations and so it could be that their views were seen as progress. However, when I think of chopping off the bits from young children and the stoning of people who fall foul of the law, I struggle with that. I feel many difficulties occurred when God was defined as favouring them and they became known as God's people. I would say if one believes all life is created by God then all are God's. However, I digress. In separating themselves from from the views of others progress has been a slow thing (IMO) and still today there are those who go on about God's perfect law in the book. Overlooking the stoning of wayward children, gay people, witches and anyone thought to have committed adultery. The burning of the offspring of priests who turn to prostitution. The so many other crimes ranging from the severity of someone wearing more than one material in your clothing or planting more than one crop in your field to the right to own slaves from surrounding countries. It may have been progress in its time, I cannot say but I struggle with the words "perfect" or "Divine" law. For me I would argue God is the mystery of life and spirit and in growing in enlightenment and respect for others we journey in our path with God. There are so many verses that ask for people to love others which seems to stand in contradiction to the definitions of God as seen before Jesus that I struggle with the old testament view or see a correlation except in the becoming more enlightened and turning away from such laws of the past.

Well people are people.Always will be.A lot of them are looking to improve their condition and often to the disadvantage of others.And I think that there are far to many homicidal maniacs in our species.I can't think where we get it from.For me, I just try to take it easy but I don't like people peeing on my rug,which is a metaphor.

Oh yeah.Surely you can define a myth,story or fictional character but if you truly believe that there is a an omnipresent divine being then isn't it arrogant and limiting to apply a human definition? Or is omnipresent divine being a human definition?Richard Bach just says the IsThe original sin is to limit the Is.Don't.

The Is is Life,Love,the Magnificent IT at the center of your being.The Is does not recognise the limitations of spacetime nor does it recognise your sorrows,fears or beliefs.

It does not see you as an upright bipedon the surface of a third planetfrom a little sunat the edge of a small galaxyof an insignificant universesandwiched for a moment betweenmultiple trillions of other universes.

It sees you reflecting Itself,and allows you the absolute freedomto do anything you wish,except to die.

Sounds interesting.I have to say I see myself as Christian but my sort. I do not go for the original sin business and like you have pointed out we are such terribly small part of the all and to think all of it is about us only is very arrogant (IMO). In a known universe that would take 13 billion light years to cross and is then thought to continue on. On a minuscule small rock in space that had about 7 billion years to develop before mankind came along, I guess we are just an after thought but to us, if not the universe, a very important one.

Have you ever wondered how,if the universe is so big.Why is light so damn slow?It's not very convenient.If you could step far enough back it would be like watching a stalactite grow.And most of the stars we can see might not actually be there any more.And another thing.I think Hoyle and Hubble were both right,but not how they think they were.

I am fascinated by your description of yourself as your kind of Christian.Given that the Old and New Testaments are full of anomalies and ambiguities (didn't one of JC's oppo's chop off a cops ear?Or was that someone I knew in the navy?) I suppose you have to be selective.I reckon that when it comes to Himself, all the bases are fairly covered.Royal descendant,Revolutionary,Fundamentalist,Reactionary,Teacher,Philosopher,Magician,Sage,Hippy and minor Deity to name but a few.You pays your money etc.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum